Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although DSM-5 stipulates that symptoms of attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) are the same for adults as children, clinical observations suggest that adults have more diverse deficits than children in higher-level executive functioning and emotional control. Previous psychometric analyses to evaluate these observations have been limited in ways addressed in the current study, which analyzes the structure of an expanded set of adult ADHD symptoms in three pooled US samples: a national household sample, a sample of health plan members, and a sample of adults referred for evaluation at an adult ADHD clinic. Exploratory factor analysis found four factors representing executive dysfunction/inattention (including, but not limited to, all the DSM-5 inattentive symptoms, with non-DSM symptoms having factor loadings comparable to those of DSM symptoms), hyperactivity, impulsivity, and emotional dyscontrol. Empirically-derived multivariate symptom profiles were broadly consistent with the DSM-5 inattentive-only, hyperactive/impulsive-only, and combined presentations, but with inattention including executive dysfunction/inattention and hyperactivity-only limited to hyperactivity without high symptoms of impulsivity. These results show that executive dysfunction is as central as DSM-5 symptoms to adult ADHD, while emotional dyscontrol is more distinct but nonetheless part of the combined presentation of adult ADHD.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Observational | high |
| grok | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Observational | high |
| opus | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Observational | high |
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it